Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

So I told you about a car they've been selling, Adrian's told you about some more that they at least worked on (Yes, I'll have an electric AX please!), and all you can say is 'not great supporters'. What is your measurement of support?

Yes, it's an electric car (rebranded 3 times) that has been on sale since 2010 in the UK. I can count on one hand the number of other big car manufacturers that have been selling so many, for so long. I'm arguing with your assertion that they're not big supporters.
They seem to have annoyed you by complaining about the Chinese, but don't rewrite history!

'have fallen behind' does not equal 'not great supporters'. PSA is surely a company that will suffer a lot from the 'diesel dropoff' having invested so heavily in it. They have been on the back foot in many ways, but an inability to keep up, again, is not the same as 'not great supporters. They're behind Renault, Nissan, BMW, sure.

Can we agree they're 'behind some other manufacturers'?

Compliance cars is a US term. I've got a Kia Soul EV, which is sold in SOME STATES as a compliance car - only where they need to do it.
See also, Fiat 500 electric. Haven't seen too many of those in Europe. Lots of electric cars are listed 'for sale' on shiny websites, but manufacturers don't really want to sell them, as they make a loss on them. Renault have praised themselves for actually getting into profit in EVs ahead of lots of other manufacturers.

Hiya. To save time arguing about whether PSA should be protected against the naughty Chinese, perhaps you could read the article I posted:-

“

Now that the other talking points have been mostly expended, PSA Group CEO Carlos Tavares has moved on to a last-ditch effort. He is arguing against the European Union's planned 2020 carbon dioxide auto industry fines (if compliance with fleet-level fuel-efficiency goals aren't met) by saying that such a course of action will "create a Chinese Trojan Horse."

”

and

“

The PSA Group exec stated at a recent auto industry event that policymakers hadn't realized that this "obvious" outcome would follow from the imposition of the European Union's 2020 carbon dioxide fines against auto manufacturers that don't meet a minimum fleet-level fuel efficiency.

”

and

“

Tavares went on to state that a major Europe-based auto manufacturer could be brought "to its knees" by such an approach, and as such it was dangerous.

I'll note here that these plans are nothing new, and that auto manufacturers have had a long time now to make changes so as to remain in compliance. They haven't done so for two main reasons: moving towards plug-in electric vehicles would lower their profit margins significantly; and the assumption of many was that fraudulent diesel car emission figures would partially help in meeting the goals.

”

So you may argue that PSA popping their badge on another companies EV means they should be protected from the Chinese because the naughty Chinese have spent their time developing EV's, but I'll have to disagree with you.

These companies should have gotten behind EV's sooner, not badged up a few cars, or produced dozens of concept cars, they should have invested in EV's. The same goes for the 3 big US old boys.

Edit - I believe my statement

“

This is a fun article. PSA, who haven't supported the EV idea, are now complaining that the sneaky Chinese (who have) might take market share by supplying cars that PSA doesn't build.

Perhaps PSA should stop complaining and build a load of EV's then?

”

conforms with the article. If you don't like what I said, then presumably you disagree with the article then?

Last edited by Martyn1981; 10-04-2018 at 4:11 PM.
Reason: Added an edit

No need for repetition, once will do. Just asking you, politely, to post for the first time the links/references on which you based your claims about the Tesla trucks ..... after all, you claimed they were facts.

And you were good enough to support your claims that test rides in the trucks didn't take place, by posting a video clip of one of the test rides taking place.

You clearly want to engage with me, as you do so immediately on everything I post (I suspect a Tesla ran over your dog), so I'm simply engaging back. So, when you're ready.

PS. Your recent 'vapourware' post, were you referring the Tesla trucks that don't exist but are driving around the US for testing, or to the Model 3 that isn't being delivered, but is now the top selling plug-in in the US? Just looking for clarification of your claims/statements .... as always.

The Economy Minister of the current administration in Germany, Peter Altmaier, was recently quoted as saying that the government there was ready to begin offering support for regional plug-in electric vehicle battery manufacturing, it has been reported.

The German Economy Minister noted that one of the possibilities on the table was the idea of perhaps exempting the firm’s locally manufactured plug-in electric vehicles (EVs and PHEVs) from some of the country’s current energy levies.

If such a course of action ends up being pursued, it would represent quite a change of approach by the government of Germany, which to date has not done much to support a transition by the auto manufacturers based in the country to plug-in electric vehicles.

Yes, it hit that title with just under 1,900 cars delivered in January 2018. Woo. Out of a total of just under 1.2m cars delivered in the US that month. 0.15% of the total market, or about 1/3 of Porsche's total, and about 3/4 of Jaguar's.

Q1 18 production seems to be accepted as just under 10,000 cars, and may finally have been up to about a quarter of that full-scale 5,000/wk production target by the end of March, nine months after production started. So that's about 12,500 built in total to the end of last month. Deposits were claimed to be closing on half a million cars last summer. Who knows where they are now? Not much of a dent on that from deliveries, so if they're still static, new sales have been sparse - or are merely keeping pace with cancellations.

Bloomberg are tracking production by allocated VINs - and it looks like they've almost hit 15,000 cars now, helped no end by almost reaching that 2,500/week. That's very good news - but very, very late. About six months after the initial targets aimed, and about on the revised targets from the start of this calendar year, six months after production started.

As for the truck... Well, I'll wait until there's something other than hype and prototypes out there, thanks, as I've explained umpteen times before. But you just go on swallowing that hype uncritically, if it makes you happy.

As for the truck... Well, I'll wait until there's something other than hype and prototypes out there, thanks, as I've explained umpteen times before. But you just go on swallowing that hype uncritically, if it makes you happy.

I'm simply trying to check the validity of your claims. Or is it a case of do what you say not what you do?

So in order to avoid swallowing what you post without critically checking it first, could you now please answer the question by supporting your claims, or else I might have to assume that it's all a load of made up, fanciful, garbage?

“

Anyways, back to you supplying proof of the grand statements that you've made, and for which I've asked many times now:-

1. Proof that the Tesla semi's at the launch event where not mules, just stage-locked vehicles barely capable of moving themselves.

2. Proof that the trucks now being load tested by Tesla are new mules, as you stated, knocked together after the launch.

3. Proof that most UK loads are near to max weight, or shall we say, within 2t of max.

I'm assuming this information is at your finger tips, after all, Shirley you wouldn't make those 'statements of fact' falsely?

Bloomberg are tracking production by allocated VINs - and it looks like they've almost hit 15,000 cars now, helped no end by almost reaching that 2,500/week. That's very good news - but very, very late. About six months after the initial targets aimed, and about on the revised targets from the start of this calendar year, six months after production started.

The Tesla Y is getting closer, though late 2019 sounds overly optimistic.

Elon did say a while back that the CAPEX on a 1m cars pa Y production line would be about the same (or possibly less) than the 1/2m Model 3 production line CAPEX, so that's good news.

Also the solar tiles are now being supplied to non Tesla staff, and the batts still can't meet demand. Lastly, if the truck delivers on the launch specs, then they expect to be somewhere around 100,000pa by 2022, making it an enormous cash cow for the company.

Other Tesla news of interest in the states, is when they'll hit 200,000 US cars delivered, which will then begin the tax credit degression.

If they keep selling M3's in the states it'll happen before 1st July, so exporting most of the M3's (this quarter) to lucky Canada, would delay all of the degressions by an extra qtr.

And, oddly, the US leccy generators have grouped together and asked the US govt to reconsider the 200,000 rule, as they are losing business fast to renewables, especially demand side generation, so want as many EV's as possible on the roads .... as they'll also be on the grids. Funny ole world.

To save time arguing about whether PSA should be protected against the naughty Chinese

”

Utterly not what I was arguing about! Not arguing about anything in the article at all, just 'not great supporters' comment.

“

So you may argue that PSA popping their badge on another companies EV means they should be protected from the Chinese

”

I said nothing of the sort!

Here's my first comment on anything to do with China - I'd be pretty sure that most cars made today, on the planet, have something from China inside them. And with the rise of electronics in cars, and the rise of Chinese electronics, it has been, and will be, more and more. Even more so with electric cars, whose batteries will very likely be Asian at least. So Peugeot have been taking advantage of nice cheap Chinese components for plenty of time, and I would AGREE with you, that they seem a bit off asking for restrictions on Chinese stuff.

I don't see any Chinese cars on UK roads just yet (I do see some MGs, I guess that might count) so I'm not worried about a Chinese takeover.

“

Looks like the PSA fanbois are out in force today!

”

I'm a big fan of Citroen, not at all of Peugeot. I don't think anything AdrianC or I have said get anywhere near 'fanboi' status.

MG definitely counts, as does LTI (or whatever they're called this week). Does Volvo count...?

The commercial market's where they're starting off. There's plenty of King Long coaches, Great Wall pickups, DSFK sootyvans etc.

Then, of course, and bang-on-topic for this thread, there's BYD, still attempting to sell electric cars into the UK.

Going back to PSA, I'm really not sure they are asking for restrictions on Chinese vehicle imports, especially since they're about to start rebadging and importing a Changan pickup as an attempt to rival the Renault Alaskan, Fiat Fullback etc.

It was a joke, because Adrian calls us fanbois if we say anything nice about Tesla.

Now, the PSA article is that they want protection from the Chinese, because the Chinese are well ahead of them with EV's.

Had PSA supported EV's, by developing them, rather than re-badging some Mitsu's, then they might not be in that position. They dragged their heels, as have many (most?) of the old school.

I think the article I posted, and the host of articles I gave you afterwards, support my statement:

“

This is a fun article. PSA, who haven't supported the EV idea, are now complaining that the sneaky Chinese (who have) might take market share by supplying cars that PSA doesn't build.

Perhaps PSA should stop complaining and build a load of EV's then?

”

Your attempt to create something different from what I posted is a waste of time. I don't believe PSA have done enough, and now they need to catch up, or shut up.

I suspect your posts are simply misinterpretations of what I've said, given that it is supported by all of the articles - please see the articles, the comments and those boldened examples I gave you. Cheers.

Edit - Just a thought, but if you are right, and I'm wrong about PSA and their EV support, then that means PSA are wrong too, since they claim they need protection from the EV boys. Perhaps this all boils down to us having different opinions on what support is. Selling re-badged EV's is massive support if you are an independent car retailer, but for any car manufacturer that wants to stay in business, they'll need to do a lot, lot better than that.

Last edited by Martyn1981; 12-04-2018 at 6:49 PM.
Reason: Added an edit

...you do realise that such cross-manufacturer JVs are fairly commonplace, and that the PSA/Mitsu tie-up has included various IC vehicles, too? Outlander/C-Crosser/4007, ASX/C4 Aircross/4008. In return (and the electric development of the i-MiEV/C-Zero/iOn was two-way), Mitsu gained access to PSA's diesel engines at a time when they had none of their own.

Frankly, the i-MiEV's biggest failings are due to the base vehicle, the thoroughly mediocre Mitsu i, which was a dismal failure as an IC vehicle and had been dropped from European sale before the electric version came back. God knows what PSA were thinking, tbh, given that they did have all that internal knowledge to work from.

...you do realise that such cross-manufacturer JVs are fairly commonplace, and that the PSA/Mitsu tie-up has included various IC vehicles, too? Outlander/C-Crosser/4007, ASX/C4 Aircross/4008. In return (and the electric development of the i-MiEV/C-Zero/iOn was two-way), Mitsu gained access to PSA's diesel engines at a time when they had none of their own.

Frankly, the i-MiEV's biggest failings are due to the base vehicle, the thoroughly mediocre Mitsu i, which was a dismal failure as an IC vehicle and had been dropped from European sale before the electric version came back. God knows what PSA were thinking, tbh, given that they did have all that internal knowledge to work from.

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

Do note, while we always aim to give you accurate product info at the point of publication, unfortunately price and terms of products and deals can always be changed by the provider afterwards, so double check first.

We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the Section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.